Nataasha Richarson and Ski Helmets

Natasha Richardson skiing accident puts focus on helmet use

Article by

Eric Wagnon
Chicago Skiing Examiner

Dear Mr. Wagnon,

This is probably one of the better articles written regarding ski helmet use. The fact that you, the author wears a helmet, makes it even more appealing to read. Your unbiased reporting on the subject made it more interesting . Your research and the use of reference is right on and should be required reading for all who would debate this subject.

However,I have come to a different conclusion. I DO NOT wear a helmet. There may come a day when I might chose to wear one depending on the given circumstances, but as an adult, recreational skier, 20 year member of our local ski patrol, I do not see the need for mandated helmet laws. I think the public has been sold a bill of goods on the extent and reasons to buy a helmet. The recent injury to Natasha Richardson, notwithstanding, very few skiers (less than 2.6%) have fatal head injuries.At this date and time, her head injury attributed to a ski accident is only speculation. They have not presented an exact cause. Your chances of slipping in the shower and hitting your head are much greater than skiing.

However, children, racers (required anyway) and snowboarders should be encouraged to wear a helmet. If you feel more comfortable wearing a helmet, please do so. It is your choice.

We have fallen victim in America to looking for the "magic bullet" to solve problems. We want quick solutions and an answer for head injuries. Problem solved: pass a mandated helmet law! That is the easy answer.

The real culprit for skiing deaths and severe injuries is within ourselves. We demand groomed slopes and fast skis. We all watch the extreme skiing movies every Fall. Then, some of us, abdicate our own personal responsibilities to ski as fast as we want, where we want and when we want. The skier "Responsibility Code" is a joke. Skiing a closed trail, skiing out of bounds, and skiing straight down a busy trail at high speed and breaking the cardinal rule, "the skier below you has the right of way" has caused more unnecessary injuries than any helmet can ever hope to prevent. Yet, we fixate on one aspect of ski injuries. Your article correctly pointed out that head injuries are minor in relation to all other accidents sustained in skiing.

The real answer to this dilemma is that the ski industry needs to get a handle on irresponsible behavior of some skiers and boarders. I understand the ski resorts dilemma. They are loathe to press the issue on the paying public. I do see some resorts taking the initiative. A local area has a "Safety Awareness" patrol that monitors the slopes to check speeds, educate or if necessary, pull lift tickets or passes. Another ski area has a courtesy patrol that meets incoming buses and gives a 5 minute speech on ski/snowboard safety. I have just read about a ski resort that now requires a mandatory class to understand the rules and regulations of a terrain park,take a test and sign a statement saying you understand the rules before they even let you use the terrain park.

Really, the ski industry needs to look at itself, step up to the plate and implement more Risk Management strategies to target those individuals who are a threat to the skiing/boarding public.

I am for freedom of choice not another law that mandates wearing a helmet. It's not the answer.

Check out ski-injury blog to see the type accidents this ski season. Would a helmet have saved some of these skiers or boarders?

The Ski Traveler